Hi, Veeky Forums. Been emailing a professor in the U.K. about fatherhood and anthropology and his works/papers on it...

Hi, Veeky Forums. Been emailing a professor in the U.K. about fatherhood and anthropology and his works/papers on it. He seems to be a nice enough guy, but obviously there's some inherit bias in this last email I've got. Is he wrong, though?

Single mothers are shit. Depending on what he means by muscles, he's also wrong. Drop this guy quick as he seems like a beta back bitch.

Yea he is, if he merely looked at fossils and bones of people from those times men had much larger upper body bones compared to women. It was highly evident that men contained and grew more muscle and their testosterone enabled that growth

Where does he even get that there is no physiological or biological evidence? There's tons of it just in bones alone that support the claim. There's even more seen today where many apes have large males and smaller females

He'll even genetically we can differentiate these growth protein spawning groups down to the Y chromosome and where It specifically starts

What a crock of shit

Physical muscles.
Other than muscles. For example, life expectancy,

Another example being metabolism. Male mammals like humans and apes have higher metabomisms

>Superior
Needs definition.

>We die younger
Probably something to do with the fact that, today, less money is spent on male health care as well as awareness of male issues (the suicide rate for example). I'm not sure what the historical rate is, but I'd imagine men doing the more physical and dangerous jobs likely has an influence. It seems like a massive stretch.

Also who is this professor? I googled him and all I can find is a former NHS childhood psychiatrist.

He's pretty obscure in the scientific community. I've just been reading a lot of his work which ironically has stuff that deals with men being fragile and weak.

are anthropology professors seriously reaching the point where they're denying basic sexual dimorphism common in nearly all mammals at this point?

I don't like the reactionist attitude that "Men are better than women is false so it must be that women are better than men". It's the exact attitude they're trying to rebuke but in the other direction.

Women and men are different (newsflash) and they're better at different things, which is how it's been since prehistory. Comparing them in general in terms of ill-defined "weakness" and trying to say which one is better is stupid.

That's essentially what I emailed him back. Saying that one sex is inherently superior to another doesn't get us anywhere.